Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] libperf cpumap: Correct reference count for perf_cpu_map__merge()

[Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>]

On 10/11/24 10:34, Leo Yan wrote:

>> The 2 non-test uses of perf_cpu_map__merge both do:
>>
>>          a = perf_cpu_map__merge(a, b);
>>
>> so another way to make the API less misleading would be
>> to introduce:
>>
>>          err = perf_cpu_map__merge_in(&a, b);
>>
>> where:
>>
>> int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig, struct perf_cpu_map 
>> *other)
>> {
>>          struct perf_cpu_map *result = perf_cpu_map__merge(*orig, other);
>>
>>          if (!result)
>>                  return -ENOMEM;
>>
>>          *orig = result;
>>          return 0;
>> }
>>
>> without any changes to perf_cpu_map__merge().
> 
> Just wandering why we cannot do the same thing for the perf_cpu_map__merge()
> function?
> 
>    int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig,
>                               struct perf_cpu_map *other)

Sorry for typo and spamming. The above suggested definition is for 
perf_cpu_map__merge().


> This can allow us to avoid any confusion in the first place. And we don't need
> to maintain two functions for the same thing.
> 
> Thanks,
> Leo
> 
>